EU referendum today

seahawk · Thu Jun 30, 2016 4:54 pm

Braybuddy wrote:
seahawk wrote:
It is not a British phenomenon. If you would allow the people in the other countries to vote, they would go the same way. Every nation wants to preserve it´s identity.

Where did you get THAT from?

http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/06/07/eur ... nd-brexit/

And those numbers were taken before the British Independence day.

Klaus · Thu Jun 30, 2016 5:07 pm

seahawk wrote:
Braybuddy wrote:
seahawk wrote:
It is not a British phenomenon. If you would allow the people in the other countries to vote, they would go the same way. Every nation wants to preserve it´s identity.

Where did you get THAT from?

http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/06/07/eur ... nd-brexit/

And where in that survey is the question about wanting to leave the EU supposed to be?

Being critical of "the EU" is a very different thing from actually wanting to leave it.

Most britons would most likely say they detest and mistrust their own politicians, but rather few of them would actually choose abolishing their parliaments and governments even so.

And those numbers were taken before the British Independence day.

You've been more in control than you will be after leaving the EU, that is the sad irony about all of this – and your leaders have just chosen to not tell you the truth about that.

Braybuddy · Thu Jun 30, 2016 5:30 pm

seahawk wrote:
Braybuddy wrote:
seahawk wrote:
It is not a British phenomenon. If you would allow the people in the other countries to vote, they would go the same way. Every nation wants to preserve it´s identity.

Where did you get THAT from?

http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/06/07/eur ... nd-brexit/

And those numbers were taken before the British Independence day.

Bit of a stretch to think that the other EU countries would leave from significant minorities wanting some powers returned, don't you think?

Revelation · Thu Jun 30, 2016 5:43 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
Well, if you mirrorimage the timeline from the EU starting poing we should have conquered France twice since WWII and fired artillery shells into Paris three times already. I´d say the benefits outweigh the problem by a fairly large margin.

C'mon, correlation is not causation. If so, the USA should have been invading Canada every few decades since the 1700s. The EU clearly has helped stabilize Europe but it isn't the only reason why we haven't seen yet another European war.

tommy1808 wrote:
And i guess in 10 years or so we will know if that was a good or a bad idea. My money is on bad, obviously, and when you see the current political turmoil in the UK, "the rats are leaving the sinking ship" comes to mind....

I guess this is what happend if you play high stakes house of cards, and that house does collapse. Do you feel that the Brexit leaders seem overly happy with the achievements? Ready to roll up the sleeves and make the UK great again? Or more like "Fuck, what are we supposed to do know?"?

It's clearly a bad idea, but my prediction is we'll see the leavers double down and go (literally) for broke.

Klaus · Thu Jun 30, 2016 6:08 pm

Revelation wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
Well, if you mirrorimage the timeline from the EU starting poing we should have conquered France twice since WWII and fired artillery shells into Paris three times already. I´d say the benefits outweigh the problem by a fairly large margin.

C'mon, correlation is not causation. If so, the USA should have been invading Canada every few decades since the 1700s. The EU clearly has helped stabilize Europe but it isn't the only reason why we haven't seen yet another European war.

We've had insurgencies, civil wars and an actual war outside the EU.

And on the other side as an example even the nationally completely intractable northern irish conflict being pacified to a significant degree by the EU ultimately being on both sides of the conflict (Ireland and the UK), pushing towards peaceful compromise, dissolving the formerly hard border and pouring targeted funds into Northern Ireland in order to turn it from an occupied, resentful backwater into a (comparatively) thriving and peaceful region. Which is now in danger of reverting back to its previous state after Brexit.

The EU is rather clearly the main reason why Europe has been as peaceful for such a long time, and the primary reason for that is that contrary to earlier times there is a framework forcing the member countries to resolve their grievances peacefully and constructively, and democratically.

Everybody has a seat at the table and a vote, nobody gets left behind and disadvantaged countries get help from the stronger ones. Not a great idea to throw all that away.

Compared to previous times all through the millenia, the EU may be the most complex approach to Europe's troubles yet, but it is also the most successful one.

tommy1808 wrote:
And i guess in 10 years or so we will know if that was a good or a bad idea. My money is on bad, obviously, and when you see the current political turmoil in the UK, "the rats are leaving the sinking ship" comes to mind....

I guess this is what happend if you play high stakes house of cards, and that house does collapse. Do you feel that the Brexit leaders seem overly happy with the achievements? Ready to roll up the sleeves and make the UK great again? Or more like "Fuck, what are we supposed to do know?"?

It's clearly a bad idea, but my prediction is we'll see the leavers double down and go (literally) for broke.

Some of them certainly will; Others will turn on their own politicians who clearly sold them a load of lies and self-serving distractions, others will for the first time inform themselves apart from the old-style propaganda lies.

Revelation · Thu Jun 30, 2016 6:39 pm

Klaus wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Some of them certainly will; Others will turn on their own politicians who clearly sold them a load of lies and self-serving distractions, others will for the first time inform themselves apart from the old-style propaganda lies.

It seems a lot of the exiters voted from based on emotion rather than logic. Lord knows if many of them have suitable logical capabilities or only work on the emotional plane.

seahawk · Thu Jun 30, 2016 7:17 pm

Braybuddy wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Braybuddy wrote:

Where did you get THAT from?

http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/06/07/eur ... nd-brexit/

And those numbers were taken before the British Independence day.

Bit of a stretch to think that the other EU countries would leave from significant minorities wanting some powers returned, don't you think?

Look at the numbers for the UK. A well made campaign fuelling the national fire and aiming to preserve the nation as a free and European state would probably work just a well in other countries, because everybody hates the immigration policy of the EU. (numbers in the link)

agill · Thu Jun 30, 2016 8:14 pm

After the total post brexit failure even my most eu-critical friends now are against leaving. Sorry to say seahawk, but youd have to be a pretty avid reader of the Sun not to see the problems of an exit campaign.

pu · Thu Jun 30, 2016 9:16 pm

tommy1808 wrote:

How is that not working? Economically the EU is just as successful as the USA,

****NO****
and again
****NO****

There are 315 000 000 people in the USA.
There are 500 000 000+ people in the EU.

So the fact that it takes 500 million EUropeans to achieve the same GDP as 315 million Americans makes the "EU just as successful as the USA" ??????

If the EU were such a success, the EU's line would look like China's. Success would mean outpacing the USA in growth as millions of EU people are freed from the terrible hideous shackles of their nation-states and bound together in common union. Instead, the EU's GDP per capita is much lower than America's and has been forever.

Matching America economically would mean the EU GDP would be about 50% bigger than America's since we have 50% more people.

...but your very German focus on the aggregate GDP as "proof" that the EU/Greater Germania is "equal" to China and America is telling. The rest of us don't care where we rank in EU-wide-GDP, which btw in your graph is already falling below the much-less-populous US and with the UK gone will take a drastic nosedive of about 12%....

Pu.

lhrnue · Thu Jun 30, 2016 9:34 pm

Hahaha ... Boris pulls a fast one and then makes a runner.

Braybuddy · Thu Jun 30, 2016 9:45 pm

seahawk wrote:
Look at the numbers for the UK. A well made campaign fuelling the national fire and aiming to preserve the nation as a free and European state would probably work just a well in other countries, because everybody hates the immigration policy of the EU. (numbers in the link)

"Probably"? So you're not certain now?

BMI727 · Fri Jul 01, 2016 12:44 am

Revelation wrote:
The EU clearly has helped stabilize Europe but it isn't the only reason why we haven't seen yet another European war.

Who kicked Bosnia out of Europe?

pu wrote:
So the fact that it takes 500 million EUropeans to achieve the same GDP as 315 million Americans makes the "EU just as successful as the USA" ??????

To be fair, it's not quite as bad when you take out the 60 million or so French who only work at avoiding work.

In this whole Brexit issue, it is great that we have the internet to give us the term "butthurt" to perfectly describe the attitude of certain folks on the continent. The Europhiles seem to have missed the memo and maybe should be heeding the wake up call they just got rather than being pissy that somebody doesn't want to be your friend.

VapourTrails · Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:21 am

With regard to the older people voting LEAVE, how does the digital divide also play into this? Would it be safe to say that many older citizens are not digitally literate, and have much more limited means of accessing up to date / in depth kind of information, left with then, increasing exposure to the propaganda. The same could be said for the socioeconomic differences.. and access to quality information.. or, in this case, they don't go looking for it.

Or is the case that in 2016, no one has any excuse to be ill-informed, or to not be able to cut through the # - with all the plethora of information out there. We are using and filtering information every day of our lives. We know what information to take (more seriously) and what to leave?

This could be said for people who now deeply regret their decision to vote LEAVE - back to the comment about researching a decision, for however small that one vote may seem..

Brexit and the growing digital divide: http://www.thelocal.se/20160629/brexit- ... tal-divide, 20 June 2016.

From the article: "This was never a referendum on the EU. It was a referendum on the modern world.” @pennyred wrote on June 24th. I couldn’t agree more. But what is this modern world of which people are opting out? It’s a world where our cars are self-driving, where work is increasingly automated, where experiences are valued more than price, where transactions happen peer to peer, where borders and geography become increasingly redundant, where our society is built by code instead of concrete, where small startups take on whole industries, where every citizen can voice an opinion and where our homes adapt to our moods and modes."

----------------

So it is said.. older people are generally more resistant to change, have more trouble adapting. Change is happening at a faster pace than ever before. They hanker for the past (well, as you get older, there is more of it LOL).

Just some thoughts. My 2p.

HGL · Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:26 am

AAPilot wrote:
Brexit was a good thing not a blunder at all. The hope now is that the rest of the eu will collapse.

But it hasn't actually happened yet. While a majority of those who voted may have voted to leave the EU no-one in Government seems to have a plan for actually doing so. Boris Johnson will not become Prime Minister and speculation is that pro-Remain (not too loud) Theresa May is front runner.

The only elected person stridently demanding an immediate departure is Farage (MEP), who is not a Member of the Parliament of the United Kingdom and not in a position to do much about it.

The question in the referendum was a simple yes or no: negotiate a new deal was not an option. This means that however much the EU might wish the UK to remain, if the UK government is to honour the referendum result it can not simply enact Art. 50 in the hope of getting a better deal.

Of course the government could simply ignore the vote and advise the EU accordingly but then it would have to account for its actions at the next general election. Far from the EU bullying the UK, it is the UK that has created the mess in which it now finds itself.

But for how much longer can the UK expect to hold the threat of withdrawal over the rest of the EU. A time will come when the EU will say, "Enough is enough. Put up or shut up." The EU can not be permanently expected to endure this "half-in, half-out" approach that the UK has always insisted on having.

HGL · Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:08 am

VapourTrails wrote:
Or is the case that in 2016, no one has any excuse to be ill-informed, or to not be able to cut through the # - with all the plethora of information out there. We are using and filtering information every day of our lives. We know what information to take (more seriously) and what to leave

I am not sure that access to the Internet necessarily means that people are better informed, if only because for many the choice is not to be. We certainly have faster access to information and a greater range of sources but that doesn't mean better quality information.

We see increasingly in online news media, for example, the reliance on unverified posts on social media like Twitter and Facebook. What might simply be one person's opinion is taken as truth even though no effort has been made to check sources, seek confirming information or question reliability of the informant.

Even in the print media we see a dumbing down or writing in an attempt to compete with online sources. Even allowing for the fact that "quality"newspapers have always shown some bias, there was at least an effort made at presenting a reasoned case.

An example of this dumbing down is the attempt to blame older people for the outcome. It is assumed that the young were in favour of Remain while the old voted Leave. Yet are things that simple?

There was a poll conducted before the ballot which suggested that the young would be overwhelmingly in favour of Remain. On the basis of demographic makeup of areas that voted one way or the other, it is assumed that the young voted Remain. Yet the actual age of voters is not recorded on the ballot papers.

While I readily accept that a majority of the young who voted expressed a desire to Remain, I also note that on the day, 28% of those entitled to vote did not vote at all. A significant portion were young people. Can the "olds" be blamed for that?

VapourTrails · Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:27 am

HGL wrote:
I am not sure that access to the Internet necessarily means that people are better informed, if only because for many the choice is not to be. We certainly have faster access to information and a greater range of sources but that doesn't mean better quality information.

We see increasingly in online news media, for example, the reliance on unverified posts on social media like Twitter and Facebook. What might simply be one person's opinion is taken as truth even though no effort has been made to check sources, seek confirming information or question reliability of the informant.

Even in the print media we see a dumbing down or writing in an attempt to compete with online sources. Even allowing for the fact that "quality"newspapers have always shown some bias, there was at least an effort made at presenting a reasoned case.

An example of this dumbing down is the attempt to blame older people for the outcome. It is assumed that the young were in favour of Remain while the old voted Leave. Yet are things that simple?

There was a poll conducted before the ballot which suggested that the young would be overwhelmingly in favour of Remain. On the basis of demographic makeup of areas that voted one way or the other, it is assumed that the young voted Remain. Yet the actual age of voters is not recorded on the ballot papers.

While I readily accept that a majority of the young who voted expressed a desire to Remain, I also note that on the day, 28% of those entitled to vote did not vote at all. A significant portion were young people. Can the "olds" be blamed for that?

Thank you for those replies, I valued the read. In the midst of the 'information revolution' the media and analysts will have enough to keep them going for at least 2020, and of course, beyond. I did not think that I would find The Spectator such riveting reading!

seahawk · Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:30 am

Braybuddy wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Look at the numbers for the UK. A well made campaign fuelling the national fire and aiming to preserve the nation as a free and European state would probably work just a well in other countries, because everybody hates the immigration policy of the EU. (numbers in the link)

"Probably"? So you're not certain now?

We can only be certain when every country gets a chance to vote out.

tommy1808 · Fri Jul 01, 2016 7:15 am

pu wrote:
****NO****
and again
****NO****

There are 315 000 000 people in the USA.
There are 500 000 000+ people in the EU.

So the fact that it takes 500 million EUropeans to achieve the same GDP as 315 million Americans makes the "EU just as successful as the USA" ??????

Yes. Same growth rate, same success.

If the EU were such a success, the EU's line would look like China's. 8/quote]

Well, we all know you are very fond of dictatorships and hence slavery, but i think we are a few steps beyond that.
And which Alien nation you think would be the investors of billions over billions over billions?

Success would mean outpacing the USA in growth as millions of EU people are freed from the terrible hideous shackles of their nation-states and bound together in common union. Instead, the EU's GDP per capita is much lower than America's and has been forever.

So? The growth rate is the same, and according to GINI, HDI, crime rate and a freaking whole lot of other categories we are doing well, thank you very much.
I know for you success, luck and happiness is a one-dimensional figure that can be expressed in US$, but to other people other things count more.

Matching America economically would mean the EU GDP would be about 50% bigger than America's since we have 50% more people.
The rest of us don't care where we rank in EU-wide-GDP, which btw in your graph is already falling below the much-less-populous US and with the UK gone will take a drastic nosedive of about 12%....

Well, for one, that nosedive won´t be anywhere near that, simply because either the UK stays in the EU in practice or a lot of GDP will move across the channel. A lot of GDP contribution of the financial services sector will have to move to the EU if they don´t stay in the common market. I would be very surprised if that isn´t already enough to overcompensate.
Plus of course, in the long haul much of that GDP growth in the EU comes from countries that were not even 1st world when they joined and the big old ones are actually slowing down compound growth in the EU. If you remove one of them, you actually get higher growth rates, not lower ones.
In that way it is mathematically correct that the UK (and Germany, and France) are holding the EU GDP growth back....

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 · Fri Jul 01, 2016 7:23 am

seahawk wrote:
We can only be certain when every country gets a chance to vote out.

Well, it took Busloads of lies to get a slight majority.....

And every populous has the chance to vote every time they do vote.

best regards
Thomas

mariner · Fri Jul 01, 2016 8:09 am

VapourTrails wrote:
Would it be safe to say that many older citizens are not digitally literate, and have much more limited means of accessing up to date / in depth kind of information, left with then, increasing exposure to the propoganda. The same could be said for the socioeconomic differences.. and access to quality information.. or, in this case, they don't go looking for it.

Or is the case that in 2016, no one has any excuse to be ill-informed, or to not be able to cut through the # - with all the plethora of information out there. We are using and filtering information every day of our lives. We know what information to take (more seriously) and what to leave?

I'm 75 and I don't count myself as "digitally literate." Much as I am relaxed with the modernist world, I don't use a mobile phone. I claim not to be able to use them, but actually it's much simpler - I don't want to talk to people on the phone.

Yet over the last few days (here) I have discovered that I am considerably more digitally literate than many much younger people.

You may be right that no one has any excuse to be ill-informed, but that suggests that people go looking for information and I'd dispute that. Even if they do, the great mass of media is ready to make up their minds for them. How are people supposed to know that they're often being fed bull dust by the media - whichever newspaper they read, whichever tv station they watch, whichever website they find? Everyone has an agenda and the power of the media is pervasive.

People "trust" the BBC and so will generally accept the BBC's view of what are quite complicated issues (I tend to), yet the BBC has its agenda, which is well to the left of centre - commitment to an ideal masquerading as fairness. Others "trust" Fox News (Murdoch), yet Fox has its own brazen agenda, well to the right of centre, and will usually condense any issue, no matter how complex, to that agenda.

Your counter might be that people have the rest of the internet to seek out the truth, and yes, they do, but (a) that's highly idealised view of much of the human race and (b) what is "the truth" and how will they know it when they've found it, even if they bother to look?

For whatever reason, a majority of people in England (rightly wrongly, who knows?) voted to leave the EU and a lot of things have happened since then. Many stock markets have largely recovered from the beating they took and while British pound is on its knees, it isn't falling anymore.

One of the leading popular voices for the exit was assumed to be Britain's next Prime Minister - and he isn't, he's out of the race. Meanwhile, a much more sensible and moderate voice is the front runner to assume the role, but a week is, as we see, a long time in politics. Look across the Atlantic, or look at Australia, where a few months ago Malcolm Turnbull was considered a shoe-in to win the election but he sold his centrist soul to the right wing - and much of the public recognised that, by sense as much as by information. Now even he admits that tomorrow's election is a kind edge.

My view that most people, of whatever age, no matter how much information is available to them, don't vote with their minds but with their hearts - and the heart can be a very fickle thing.

mariner

Klaus · Fri Jul 01, 2016 9:25 am

BMI727 wrote:
In this whole Brexit issue, it is great that we have the internet to give us the term "butthurt" to perfectly describe the attitude of certain folks on the continent. The Europhiles seem to have missed the memo and maybe should be heeding the wake up call they just got rather than being pissy that somebody doesn't want to be your friend.

If the Brexit campaign had had anything to do with what the EU actually is in real life, you could have a point.

The problem is that this ongoing campaign has waved a straw man around which has so little to do with the actual EU that we have been pretty much alone about reforming and improving the EU for many years already, with the UK mostly just contributing general interference and blackmail for squeezing ever more extra-special privileges out of the EU with almost zero regard for anybody else or for the european whole.

I have no doubt that the propaganda lies will get ramped up even further in England & Wales desperately trying to mask the growing discrepancies between the propaganda and the real-world effects of the referendum, but let's just see how they fare at that.

At the same time the actual grievances of many british Brexit voters will remain unresolved – and many even knew they didn't care about the EU in the first place; They just wanted to lash out at "the establishment" who they felt were responsible for making their own lives miserable, and Brexit will leave that actual conflict unresolved because it never had anything to do with the EU in the first place (sometimes actually the opposite – without EU cohesion funds several british regions would have been a lot worse off than they actually were).

So who will the scapegoat be then when the EU straw man can't be used for that any more?

VapourTrails · Fri Jul 01, 2016 9:26 am

Hi mariner, Thanks, your reply was very interesting and had a lot of valid points. I am idealist LOL, and I increasingly see the need to sift through information more, even though I see myself as highly digitally literate. Most people I am sure can get overwhelmed by the amount of information out there: aka the modern world period.

Your mention of the BBC, I am one of these people that inherently trusts these, and other similar broadcasters, and probably fail to see the hidden agenda that may be there. I am sure hoping that the 'cut through' is improving with age! I could learn a lot from the younger generation though and am really starting to listen to what they have to say.

Ever since Brexit I am 'second guessing' and trying to cut through what I am hearing in the media. Yes, we have a general election here tomorrow. Those two are kinda related and will come into play for a lot of us I am sure, as our hearts, and/I mean our minds, do the vote thing.

scbriml · Fri Jul 01, 2016 9:42 am

mariner wrote:
For whatever reason, a majority of people in England (rightly wrongly, who knows?) voted to leave the EU and a lot of things have happened since then. Many stock markets have largely recovered from the beating they took and while British pound is on its knees, it isn't falling anymore.

The markets have recovered, but I'm not confident it's a true reflection of the situation. We're currently in a "phoney war" scenario and I suspect the true picture will only start to emerge once Article 50 is actually invoked.

Klaus wrote:
So who will the scapegoat be then when the EU straw man can't be used for that any more?

We'll still blame the French and Germans, because everything is their fault.

tommy1808 · Fri Jul 01, 2016 9:59 am

Klaus wrote:
BMI727 wrote:
In this whole Brexit issue, it is great that we have the internet to give us the term "butthurt" to perfectly describe the attitude of certain folks on the continent. The Europhiles seem to have missed the memo and maybe should be heeding the wake up call they just got rather than being pissy that somebody doesn't want to be your friend.

If the Brexit campaign had had anything to do with what the EU actually is in real life, you could have a point.

The problem is that this ongoing campaign has waved a straw man around which has so little to do with the actual EU that we have been pretty much alone about reforming and improving the EU for many years already, with the UK mostly just contributing general interference and blackmail for squeezing ever more extra-special privileges out of the EU with almost zero regard for anybody else or for the european whole.

I have no doubt that the propaganda lies will get ramped up even further in England & Wales desperately

The most funny thing about this is that pretty much everything the EU is blamed for is actually Margret Thatchers legacy and the Tories doing, which policies are BMI727s dreamworld, or close to it. And he does the same, his favorite neoliberal policies "ruin" (exaggeration) a country, but of course the people that tend to work against those policies are at fault. ....
Scapegoatism at its best.... just like now the evil, evil EU is to blame for not handing out free lunch and in no way is it the voters or the campaigners fault that they are in a bit of trouble. It is always "the others", i wonder if that is why racism and "leave" vote seem to coincide a lot.

scbriml wrote:
The markets have recovered, but I'm not confident it's a true reflection of the situation. We're currently in a "phoney war" scenario and I suspect the true picture will only start to emerge once Article 50 is actually invoked.

I would suspect that the current pound value just prices in the expectations of the markets. Right now i presume that the markets anticipate the UK to stay in the common market and just lose influence and attractiveness for new investments to some degree.
I think that there wasn´t really a panic, just a quick transition to a new perceived value of the Pound. Just like changes in the interest rate lead to such technical adjustments as long they are within expectations. So, we can expect a little further drop when the Bank of England reduces the rates sometime soon.

best regards
Thomas

Klaus · Fri Jul 01, 2016 10:01 am

scbriml wrote:
Klaus wrote:
So who will the scapegoat be then when the EU straw man can't be used for that any more?

We'll still blame the French and Germans, because everything is their fault.

Hmyeah, of course; The perennial standby. 8-)

That would certainly complete Britain's reversal back to the early 20th century. I just don't think Hollande and Merkel would be up for their assigned parts in such a re-enactment... ;-)

mariner · Fri Jul 01, 2016 11:09 am

scbriml wrote:
The markets have recovered, but I'm not confident it's a true reflection of the situation. We're currently in a "phoney war" scenario and I suspect the true picture will only start to emerge once Article 50 is actually invoked.

Maybe - I can't predict the future. All I know is that the world doesn't stop, nations don't stop, life goes on.

The world didn't stop with the Brexit vote, stock markets crashed and then recovered, the pound stopped falling, Johnson's out as future PM, some sense may have taken hold of governance in the UK. and, with any luck, the proto-Stalinist Corbyn will go.

I take what comes along. :-)

mariner

mariner · Fri Jul 01, 2016 11:21 am

mariner wrote:
scbriml wrote:
The markets have recovered, but I'm not confident it's a true reflection of the situation. We're currently in a "phoney war" scenario and I suspect the true picture will only start to emerge once Article 50 is actually invoked.

Maybe - I can't predict the future. All I know is that the world doesn't stop, nations don't stop, life goes on.

The world didn't stop with the Brexit vote, stock markets crashed and then recovered, the pound stopped falling, Johnson's out as future PM, some sense may have taken hold of governance in the UK. and, with any luck, the proto-Stalinist Corbyn will go.

I take what comes along.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/ ... utions-own

"The leave campaign is a revolution, and like all revolutions, it will eat its own"

mariner

Braybuddy · Fri Jul 01, 2016 11:56 am

On a more serious level, what is Chrissie Hynde doing running for leader of the Conservative Party?

I always wondered what happened to her . . .

Pihero · Fri Jul 01, 2016 12:55 pm

BMI727 wrote:
Who kicked Bosnia out of Europe?

You tell us !
As far as we know, Bosnia and Herzegovina is in the "Stabilisation and Association "phase of joining the EU since 2008.
Should be member in the not too distant future.
( Btw, I am surprised that a leave voter, against immigration, would be worried about four million people, 51% of them Muslims ready to invade the english shores :lol:

)

BMI727 wrote:
To be fair, it's not quite as bad when you take out the 60 million or so French who only work at avoiding work.

Problem is for your argument that France has a far greater productivity than the not-any-more-great Britain.

BMI727 wrote:
In this whole Brexit issue, it is great that we have the internet to give us the term "butthurt" to perfectly describe the attitude of certain folks on the continent.

Yep ! and you still don't know how to use it : Not the first hint of a shadow of a clue : no one ready to take over and lead, just a bunch of ex-bullies who now look a lot more like headless chickens running all over the court yard... and a still very arrogant population who'd been screwed by their own leaders over a north-sea oil barrel pretending that they 'll leave the EU when they're ready and not a second before. :roll:

You don't even realize that you've lost , with the moral high ground, any pretense of seriousness that you had left. and your politicians sound EXACTLY like your football hooligans who, thank God have been kicked out of these shores.
You wanted to leave the EU : you have the oportunity to do so NO0WWW, so like your outgoing pom PM said :" For Heaven's sake, leave , man !

scbriml · Fri Jul 01, 2016 1:01 pm

Klaus wrote:
I just don't think Hollande and Merkel would be up for their assigned parts in such a re-enactment...

It's not like they'd be asked! :lol:

victrola · Fri Jul 01, 2016 1:40 pm

pu wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:

How is that not working? Economically the EU is just as successful as the USA,

****NO****
and again
****NO****

There are 315 000 000 people in the USA.
There are 500 000 000+ people in the EU.

So the fact that it takes 500 million EUropeans to achieve the same GDP as 315 million Americans makes the "EU just as successful as the USA" ??????

If the EU were such a success, the EU's line would look like China's. Success would mean outpacing the USA in growth as millions of EU people are freed from the terrible hideous shackles of their nation-states and bound together in common union. Instead, the EU's GDP per capita is much lower than America's and has been forever.

Matching America economically would mean the EU GDP would be about 50% bigger than America's since we have 50% more people.

...but your very German focus on the aggregate GDP as "proof" that the EU/Greater Germania is "equal" to China and America is telling. The rest of us don't care where we rank in EU-wide-GDP, which btw in your graph is already falling below the much-less-populous US and with the UK gone will take a drastic nosedive of about 12%....

Pu.

If anything you have just made an argument for further integration of Europe. The United States is a massive single market with much more integration and freedom of movement and capital than the EU. IF it is more successful than the EU, then obviously more, not less integration of Europe would be called for.

Olddog · Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:46 pm

victrola wrote:

If anything you have just made an argument for further integration of Europe. The United States is a massive single market with much more integration and freedom of movement and capital than the EU. IF it is more successful than the EU, then obviously more, not less integration of Europe would be called for.

Don't tell that to them: they think a Federal State is an other name for Hell :mrgreen:

seahawk · Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:04 pm

The Uk will come out of it stronger than ever. Free from the chains of the EU and still the most exciting and interesting place for business in Europe. There is a reason why all successful airlines in the EU have their roots in the British market. And London as a global financial hub will just laugh at anybody suggesting backwaters like Paris or Frankfurt could be a threat. With no immigrants to pay for and no money wasted to the EU, the Uk will be the boom country in Europe.

Klaus · Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:05 pm

scbriml wrote:
Klaus wrote:
I just don't think Hollande and Merkel would be up for their assigned parts in such a re-enactment...

It's not like they'd be asked!

It's just a bit difficult to re-enact a war when the presumed aggressor simply shows no interest in attacking or invading anyone... ;-)

On a more sober note, I'm wondering if at least a few britons realize the connection between the Somme centenary today and the Brexit vote they've just made in an outbreak of xenophobic nationalism. I've listened in to the memorial on BBC and couldn't help wondering...

Tugger · Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:29 pm

Pihero wrote:
You don't even realize that you've lost , with the moral high ground, any pretense of seriousness that you had left. and your politicians sound EXACTLY like your football hooligans who, thank God have been kicked out of these shores.
You wanted to leave the EU : you have the oportunity to do so NO0WWW, so like your outgoing pom PM said :" For Heaven's sake, leave , man !

This to me is silly. No one has "lost" anything. The EU is designed for this, it is a free union of member states that participate willingly. If membership is desired, it is considered and requirements must be met. And if a member state wishes to leave they are free to do so. The "punitive" elements I am hearing should not be encouraged or even desired, there are consequences of course but why should anyone be punished for leaving somewhere freely?

As to the "you must do it now, you have no choice" crowd.... No one has yet answered my "jumping off the cliff" analogy. And, no, the UK does not have to do it now, and it has stated as much in the past days. It will take its time as needed to ensure an orderly departure (if so desired). And when it is the proper time, the needed actions will be taken.

The EU is there for governments, not for people. Some like to think otherwise but it is specifically designed to operate on a government to government level. There are rules and requirements it imposes on the various governments that flow to and impact the populace but that is how it functions. It created the rules, and the rules govern how a nation will depart.

Tugg

Pihero · Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:34 pm

seahawk wrote:
The Uk will come out of it stronger than ever. Free from the chains of the EU and still the most exciting and interesting place for business in Europe. There is a reason why all successful airlines in the EU have their roots in the British market. And London as a global financial hub will just laugh at anybody suggesting backwaters like Paris or Frankfurt could be a threat. With no immigrants to pay for and no money wasted to the EU, the Uk will be the boom country in Europe.

So start proving your point and trigger article 50. Otherwise, keep on being the party-crasher who is stuffing himself up with the buffet and haven't realised that he is no longer welcome... because that's exactly what you're looking like and the more disgusting it gets the longer you're in the ballroom insulting the guests.
If that's your idea of a country's greatness, I wonder, like Klaus, whether these soldiers on the Somme knew that what they were dying for would last less than a century...
Was it worth it ?
Of course it is striking that the murder of a member of parliament in the name of Britain first looks more and more like a victory for the leavers... She was in your eyes a traitor, wasn't she ?
As for Backwaters Frankfurt, you obviously haven't had a glass of Apfelkorn in Sachsenhausen... just to enjoy to the full a city that is more fun to visit than any other town in England.

Klaus · Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:41 pm

seahawk wrote:
The Uk will come out of it stronger than ever. Free from the chains of the EU

Sure, if that bit with the "chains of the EU" wasn't just lies and propaganda. Luckily for you, you will actually find that out now.

and still the most exciting and interesting place for business in Europe.

Say xenophobic mobs harrassing immigrants and destroyed shops run by immigrants?

Sure, that will make every foreign tourist or investor feel right at home!
The foreseeable tariff hike and financial services moving over back into EU territory will just be the cherry on top.

There is a reason why all successful airlines in the EU have their roots in the British market.

Which ones would that be?
Easyjet has just announced that they are planning to move back to the EU if the exit will go through; Ryanair is also planning to shift away from Britain, which is obviously a necessity with most of their business happening in the common market.

And London as a global financial hub will just laugh at anybody suggesting backwaters like Paris or Frankfurt could be a threat.

It's simple: You have chosen to exit the EU. This means that all London-based firms will lose their ability to conduct certain kinds of financial deals in the EU because they would have to be on EU territory for that. Even a common market access treaty would not recover that ability as far as I'm aware, because they would still be outside of EU oversight. So they simply have to move to the EU if they want to have full access to the common market, which had been the primary reason why London had been the primary european financial center. And that movement has already begun.

With no immigrants to pay for and no money wasted to the EU, the Uk will be the boom country in Europe.

In the coming months and years you will find out that:

a) The immigrants were actually invited by your own national government when the eastern countries became members of the EU; Germany kept some limitations initially, but Britain deliberately chose not to do that and to grant full access to eastern-european workers. And they have actually been a net boon for the british economy and tax revenue; The Brexit propaganda has just picked them as easy scapegoats for a crumbling social system starved out by again the national british government in Westminster with its brutal austerity policy, but I guess they thought: "better if they hate somebody else, so tell them it's the immigrants, not us, who are pushing the NHS to the brink!".

b) You should know by now that the number on that red propaganda bus was complete fiction and fantasy – Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and even Nigel Farage have all disowned that number immediately after the polls had closed. And the relatively small rest after subtraction of the Thatcher rebate and the returned funds flowing back into Britain is far more than offset by the commercial advantages Britain had by being an EU member. This will now all go away, so you will indeed be able to compare before and after. I hope you'll like it.

c) History has shown one practically universal constant: Mobile, welcoming, multicultural places tend to be far more successful than rigid, xenophobic monocultures which tend to turn into stale backwaters where nobody goes unless it's absolutely necessary. If that's what Britain is now turning into, your economy is just toast and you can just as well shutter your economy for good.

tommy1808 · Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:03 pm

Tugger wrote:
As to the "you must do it now, you have no choice" crowd.... No one has yet answered my "jumping off the cliff" analogy. And, no, the UK does not have to do it now, and it has stated as much in the past days. It will take its time as needed to ensure an orderly departure (if so desired). And when it is the proper time, the needed actions will be taken.

That is what the two years are made for. Any attempt to get more time is a violation of the Lisbon treaty at least in spirit.

Best regards
Thomas

Klaus · Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:07 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
As to the "you must do it now, you have no choice" crowd.... No one has yet answered my "jumping off the cliff" analogy. And, no, the UK does not have to do it now, and it has stated as much in the past days. It will take its time as needed to ensure an orderly departure (if so desired). And when it is the proper time, the needed actions will be taken.

That is what the two years are made for. Any attempt to get more time is a violation of the Lisbon treaty at least in spirit.

The negotiation period can actually be extended, but that requires a unanimous decision of all member countries.

If no result can be reached before the negotiation period runs out, the membership simply ends and the exiting country falls into default third country state under WTO trading rules.

Tugger · Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:13 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
That is what the two years are made for. Any attempt to get more time is a violation of the Lisbon treaty at least in spirit.

Best regards
Thomas

But you are flat wrong, the two years starts at the time a government invokes Article 50. Not before. And certainly not because a non-binding vote in a country. That vote directs the government what to. The government does not then then immediately jump off a cliff (still waiting for some one to answer that question). The government then needs to organize itself to be able to implement what is entailed with invoking Article 50. Only a fool would not take their time and enter into those "two years" with the strongest hand they could and the best understand of what they will do. In the meantime the nation is still retains its same membership within the EU, albeit with the "lame duck" tied around its neck for any internal/EU issues.

Again, these are the rules of the EU. No one is making anything up out of whole cloth.

Tugg

seahawk · Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:14 pm

Everything I posted in the last few days was copied from social media posts by Brexit supporters. I hope it shows the problem the UK faces. This referendum gave the nationalists and xenophobes a sense of victory and support. Putting that genie in back in the bottle will not be easy and the politicians in the UK. especially those of the big parties, should really be blamed for allowing this. Compared to that the political and economic problems are just a side show.

Olddog · Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:23 pm

I understand that British people that go on saying but but article 50 will be our choice, have not realized that EU is not waiting for them: all European agencies in UK are starting to go back on EU territories, with all the perks and very well paid jobs.

Klaus · Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:28 pm

seahawk wrote:
Everything I posted in the last few days was copied from social media posts by Brexit supporters.

I see. So that's why it sounded so autistic even by political forum debate standards...! ;-)

I hope it shows the problem the UK faces. This referendum gave the nationalists and xenophobes a sense of victory and support. Putting that genie in back in the bottle will not be easy and the politicians in the UK. especially those of the big parties, should really be blamed for allowing this. Compared to that the political and economic problems are just a side show.

Indeed. If the campaigns (not just prior to this referendum vote, but all through the decades of british EU membership!) had actually laid out serious cases with the actual pros and cons and if they had really attempted to inform the voters as well as possible instead of just appealing to their lowest and worst instincts, the damage would now not be as extensive as it is, regardless of how it would have gone eventually.

Tugger · Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:35 pm

seahawk wrote:
This referendum gave the nationalists and xenophobes a sense of victory and support. Putting that genie in back in the bottle will not be easy and the politicians in the UK. especially those of the big parties, should really be blamed for allowing this.

I think it also was a wake you call for the UK. Honestly. This discussion has really only now begun in earnest because up until now this was all conjecture and supposition. Now it is a bucket of cold water and you have to decide what you really want to do.
Allowing a free vote of the people is something that I am OK. I think it was a bit foolish but there have been many elections and votes that were foolish.

Olddog wrote:
I understand that British people that go on saying but but article 50 will be our choice, have not realized that EU is not waiting for them: all European agencies in UK are starting to go back on EU territories, with all the perks and very well paid jobs.

Whatever is allowed under the EU conventions is fine of course. And private companies may wish to relocate as well. However, and I will say it again, the EU functions under rules and law, and the UK is part of the EU and is still meeting its obligations as required by the EU. The EU as a rule following body has nothing to complain about and no reason to change anything at this time. When Article 50 is invoked, THAT is what the two years is for.

Or is the EU violating the spirit of the law themselves?

The UK does not have to invoke Article 50 at this point. Period. What if it never does?

Tugg

Aesma · Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:46 pm

If you want the strongest hand possible in the negotiation, waiting until next year to start it is not the way.

Klaus · Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:56 pm

Tugger wrote:
Whatever is allowed under the EU conventions is fine of course. And private companies may wish to relocate as well. However, and I will say it again, the EU functions under rules and law, and the UK is part of the EU and is still meeting its obligations as required by the EU. The EU as a rule following body has nothing to complain about and no reason to change anything at this time. When Article 50 is invoked, THAT is what the two years is for.

Or is the EU violating the spirit of the law themselves?

The UK dragging their heels for months and months would actually violate the spirit of the Lisbon Treaty, while at least on paper still being within the letter of the treaty.

That is the difference, and since the UK are very much dependent on the goodwill of the EU27, that would certainly not strengthen their case at all, especially not with the headless-chicken outcome in London which is outright scary in this situation.

The UK does not have to invoke Article 50 at this point. Period. What if it never does?

That would make it even worse because that would substantially undermine the legitimacy of any UK government which was then blatantly operating against the expressed intention of its own population.

Pihero · Fri Jul 01, 2016 6:29 pm

Klaus wrote:
The UK dragging their heels for months and months would actually violate the spirit of the Lisbon Treaty, while at least on paper still being within the letter of the treaty.

That is the difference, and since the UK are very much dependent on the goodwill of the EU27, that would certainly not strengthen their case at all, especially not with the headless-chicken outcome in London which is outright scary in this situation.

The UK does not have to invoke Article 50 at this point. Period. What if it never does?

That would make it even worse because that would substantially undermine the legitimacy of any UK government which was then blatantly operating against the expressed intention of its own population.

Did anyone say :"DEMOCRACY !" ?

Have a look at the "Charlie Hebdo " cartoon on Brexit : Charlie on Brexit
The title means : "The English at last masters in their own home" !
Even I wouldn't dare to have it as an image here.
But it really does sum up what a lot of the French think of this sorry affair.

Tugger · Fri Jul 01, 2016 6:41 pm

Aesma wrote:
If you want the strongest hand possible in the negotiation, waiting until next year to start it is not the way.

To put it simply: Why?

Why would you not wait until you actually had everything in order inside your nation and had clear direction from and understanding with your citizens? Why would you not do that?

Especially with a non-binding referendum?

Klaus wrote:
The UK dragging their heels for months and months would actually violate the spirit of the Lisbon Treaty, while at least on paper still being within the letter of the treaty.

So the EU pulling anything out of the UK in advance of notice would also violate the spirit?

And how do you actually immediately apply a non-binding referendum into official action?

Klaus wrote:
That is the difference, and since the UK are very much dependent on the goodwill of the EU27,

That I would dispute. They are not dependent on "goodwill", they are dependent on laws, rules, and regulations as implemented under the various treaties of the EU and meeting the obligations set forth under them.

If the EU turns out to be a punitive and vindictive organization towards a full member that is meeting their obligations then that is another story and a complete failure of this "greater Europe".... what...experiment? And I cannot believe the EU would do as you would advise.

Klaus wrote:
Tugger wrote:
The UK does not have to invoke Article 50 at this point. Period. What if it never does?

That would make it even worse because that would substantially undermine the legitimacy of any UK government which was then blatantly operating against the expressed intention of its own population.

How so? If it did not implement it, that does not mean it has "operated against" its citizens. If in fact the country decides to do something different, whether via elected officials or another vote, whatever, the country does not HAVE TO invoke Article 50. And if they do not, then they do not. And the EU will work with that and move forward. If they act petty and punitive (as opposed to professionally and as a law based organization) how does that improve the EU at all?

And Klaus, you never did respond to my earlier question:

Tugger wrote:
Think of it as if you were on the edge of a ravine and had to get to the other side, would jumping off immediately really be the best course of action? Or would you look at everything, consider you position, possible paths to the others side, and even reconsider if the other side was the actual best option now that you are there?

To Klaus and Aesma, what would you do in the precipice example I just gave? Honestly?

Well?
Tugg

scbriml · Fri Jul 01, 2016 7:24 pm

pihero wrote:
You wanted to leave the EU : you have the oportunity to do so NO0WWW, so like your outgoing pom PM said :" For Heaven's sake, leave , man !

Seeing how much it clearly annoys you, we'll drag it out for years.

Klaus wrote:
On a more sober note, I'm wondering if at least a few britons realize the connection between the Somme centenary today and the Brexit vote they've just made in an outbreak of xenophobic nationalism. I've listened in to the memorial on BBC and couldn't help wondering...

I did actually wonder yesterday if the vote had been after the anniversary whether a number of Brexiteers might have had pause for thought.

pihero wrote:
I wonder, like Klaus, whether these soldiers on the Somme knew that what they were dying for would last less than a century...
Was it worth it ?

Given what happened just over 20 years later, I'd say yes, sadly they all died in vain.

Tugger wrote:
But you are flat wrong, the two years starts at the time a government invokes Article 50. Not before.

Yes, even Juncker now appreciates the EU will have to wait due to the political situation in the UK.

Even once a new PM has been installed, the next step is far from clear and there are a lot of conflicting views as to what's required from a constitutional perspective. There are those that claim Article 50 cannot be invoked without an Act of Parliament and others that claim a General Election will be required with the invocation of Article 50 being an item on the manifesto. Even then, the Liberal Democrats have already stated they will conduct the next election on the basis of rejoining the EU!

Tugger wrote:
Allowing a free vote of the people is something that I am OK. I think it was a bit foolish but there have been many elections and votes that were foolish.

The Government certainly missed a couple of tricks. The simplest would have been to declare that in order for the UK to leave the EU, a leave majority was required for each 'component' of the UK (England, Scotland, Wales & N. Ireland).

Tugger wrote:
The UK does not have to invoke Article 50 at this point. Period. What if it never does?

This is another topic that's exercising some minds here. In all honesty, it kind of goes against basic democratic principles if the will of the people is ignored. That said, there are some areas where Parliament does ignore the will of the people (capital punishment being one). As much as I wanted us to stay in the EU, I'd be very uncomfortable if the Government simply ignored the referendum result.

Klaus wrote:
The UK dragging their heels for months and months would actually violate the spirit of the Lisbon Treaty, while at least on paper still being within the letter of the treaty.

You know, "the spirit" of legislation is something that's entirely subjective. To you it means one thing, to someone else it means something entirely different. If legislation requires the interpretation of "its spirit", then it's badly written.

Pihero · Fri Jul 01, 2016 7:36 pm

Tugger wrote:
Think of it as if you were on the edge of a ravine and had to get to the other side, would jumping off immediately really be the best course of action? Or would you look at everything, consider you position, possible paths to the others side, and even reconsider if the other side was the actual best option now that you are there?
To Klaus and Aesma, what would you do in the precipice example I just gave? Honestly?

Well?
The precipice has always been there.
The leaders had no parachutes ( for everybody ), no plan for a bridge.
Why don't you just acknowledge the fact that your bullying leaders didn't have a clue on how to live - or survive - outside the EU. so they are just running getting caught tighter and tighter in the noose of the lies that they fed their supporters for months :
- No £ 350 M a week to the NHS or even100 M
- No reduction on immigtration : Dan Hannan has already said that people expecting a drop in the immigration are "going to be disappointed" ( How about frakking pissed off instead ?)
- No staying in the "Common Market" ( remember the "having and eating one's own cake ?"
- No sovereignty back ( whatever that was )
... and the daily rag said : " what Brexit means for its readers: the pound is worth less which means holidays cost more, Britons will lose the right to work, buy holiday homes, travel and study without restrictions in the EU and pensions have lost value. All in all, some things to worry its readers even if they share the paper's politics. "
I guess you could live with that !

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net